“In Twombly, the Supreme Court announced the new plausibility standard by which pleadings are to be judged: a complaint must allege ‘enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’ A facially plausible complaint is one that ‘raise[s] a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence’ of the alleged wrongdoing. However, despite affirming the Twombly decision, Iqbal substantially bolstered plausibility as a device by which lower courts can dismiss weak, not just meritless, cases. Iqbal is the focus of the inquiry here because the Court’s two-pronged approach to plausibility analysis systematically exploits pro se litigants’ vulnerabilities to dismiss their seemingly weak suits.”

Source: Rory K. Schneider. The Illiberal Construction of Pro Se Pleadings. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 159:585, 607-608. 2011.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s